> The challenge lies in recovery," Holley said. "It's like getting salt out of bread doughâ"we need to do a lot more research, development and policy to make the recovery of these critical minerals economically feasible."

Just because a mineral exists in tailings doesn't mean it's in any way economically reasonable to recover it. This is a geologist pointing out that research needs to be done to make these recovery processes more efficient, and he's right. But the headline is all wrong.

England is 150 miles across at it's smallest (and closer to 400 miles at it's longest). Most deep water is very far from the coast.

And the water table itself can be anywhere from 6 feet to 200 feet, which honestly isn't that deep.

Well since the reservoirs are at 67% capacity, I'd say all they need is another good rainfall to add another 33%.

Water lost to the sea is generally industrial discharge that isn't being reprocessed rather than civilian usage. Leaking pipes are far more likely to contribute to ground water which remains fresh.

Reservoir capacity has dropped below these levels in the recent past and many times previously and recovered, there's no reason to believe it won't recover again. 70% capacity is not a red alert moment.

Any forecast involving dire predictions for a time the authors will likely be retired and unaccountable should be taken with more than a grain of salt. And this is a "think tank" report. There isn't a think tank in the world that isn't funded by people looking for a political outcome. And given an increasingly authoritarian UK government, handing over "crisis" control of the water supply would be a very bad thing indeed.

They're also talking about capacity dropping just below 70%, something that has happened several times before without coming even close to some catastrophic effect. The UK is an island nation - perhaps they should be funding desalination plants. And if overpopulation is putting too much strain on the water supply, maybe it's finally time to use a little restraint with mass immigration.

Lastly, no one "loses" water from leaky pipes - water is never destroyed it's only moved from one place to another. Leaky underground pipes just mean those trillion liters are entering the water table not vanishing never to be seen again.

I've always been curious as to the motivation of people like you who do not read english to understand the meaning being expressed but instead to seek out possible spelling or grammatical errors and point them out. The internet is filled with such mistakes but the vast number of people read it, possibly not even notice it, but regardless just keep reading on since the gist of the post is clearly understandable.

English is not computer code, it's a highly flexible communication method and as long as the meaning is understood, accuracy is unnecessary.

So tell me, what do you get out of it? Attention? A feeling of self righteousness? I'm genuinely curious.

You're implying that out of the hundreds they charge every month, only a tiny pittance, amounting to just over $12 a month, accounts for the actual equivalent production of power that they are taking from you? That everything else is infrastructure?

No, just no.

What is really being argued for here is the right of the family to bury they're loved ones with dignity and about the rights of the Estate, not the dead.

The dead don't care if you resurrect a low fidelity simulacrum of them, they're dead. But the pain such a recreation could cause the family - that's the crime that needs to be protected against. They should have some control over this being allowed.

I also suspect this about setting a legal foundation for preventing 3rd parties from recreating public figures for reasons of profit or power. We already grant most copyright as "Author's life + 70 years" - perhaps we should apply this same standard to the dead.

The power companies are clearly profiting from that - they are charging for more for what they take. Instead, they should be giving homeowners full credit on their bill at the same rate as they themselves charge. The homeowner is the one who invested in that infrastructure, NOT the power company.

The power requirements of AI and the upcoming infrastructure demands of EV's are just two examples of what solar and wind will never be able to cover. Unless the plan is to deforest the EU and carpet it with solar panels and wind turbines and continue with reliance on Russian NG, we need to start building nuclear. It's clean, safe, and reliable power. Modern designs can have a plant up and running in 5 years if you remove the antiquated regulations from the age when people had more fear than common sense.

Well the plague is bacterial, not viral, and even the WHO says you shouldn't get the oddball vaccine that was developed for it. Infection is easily treated with common antibiotics.

You also usually don't contract it unless you live in squalor or come in contact with infected animals. And the only way you die from it is if you didn't seek treatment and/or you had another serious ailment and this pushed you over the edge.

Prairie dogs out in Colorado are well known to be plague carriers, the disease never went away, we just know how to cure it now.

If you look at the actual chart provided by Ember (and linked in OP's post) you'll see the solar values are directly tied to the season. By December the energy production of these vast solar arrays drops well below that of even coal.

Nuclear is the only consistent energy source in the EU and requires far less destruction of land than solar. They would do well to invest in nuclear right now to supply future energy projects. The past trend to decommission functional nuclear plants was very ill advised.

Once configured the way I like it, it has been a very good performer with privacy by default in mind. But if FF folds it will take LibreWolf with it.

The problem with opinion pieces like this, there is no offer of a better solution. Chrome? No thank you. Addon capabilities were hobbled on that platform because Google was losing access to your data. This applies to all the chromium derivatives as well like Edge.

I had used Brave for some time as the "lesser of chrome evils" but at least for me it has become unstable and bloated in recent months - hence the move to LibreWolf.

LibreWolf however is not without it's shortfalls - while it maintains parity with the FF releases, the maintainer has their own ideas about how your browser should behave and it requires some technical knowledge to override their decisions. For example - you cannot enable dark mode, a very common configuration choice, by default. You have to edit the config to override the restriction. And trying to set LibreWolf as the default browser requires jumping through unnecessary hoops.

Currently I'm waiting patiently for LadyBird to mature. There's potential there.

This is the WaPo article:
https://www.washingtonpost.com...

OP used an MSN link which ironically is another way big tech has been siphoning off your data. Google loves to return an entire page full of MSN links because Microsoft has been aggregating and news links for fun an profit using Edge as a default browser. The story should have included eschewing the use of Edge along with Chrome.

Not replaced... slowly made extinct because there is no longer an incentive to get a deep understanding of the underlying code. People entering the field will, by and large, not invest themselves any further than necessary, relying on the tools to do the work for them.

Whats on the horizon are only "highly skilled prompt writers"